On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby wargamer1985 » Sat 14 Jan 2017 19:43

HrcAk47 wrote:
Mike wrote:A TOW-2B would just be a TOW-2 with a couple more AP. The AP is already so high on the TOW-2 that there isn't much room left for it.


TOW-2 could go down to 24AP while the TOW-2A can be 26AP.

What this means is a global nerf for BLUFOR, but why not.

The issue is that, realistically, the BGM-71D warrants 25 AP.
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 14 Jan 2017 20:01

wargamer1985 wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:
Mike wrote:A TOW-2B would just be a TOW-2 with a couple more AP. The AP is already so high on the TOW-2 that there isn't much room left for it.


TOW-2 could go down to 24AP while the TOW-2A can be 26AP.

What this means is a global nerf for BLUFOR, but why not.

The issue is that, realistically, the BGM-71D warrants 25 AP.


Not really, no. 800-900 is 24AP. 900-1000 25, and above is 26.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
hansbroger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4428
Joined: Sun 28 Jul 2013 03:45
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby hansbroger » Sat 14 Jan 2017 20:53

Razzmann wrote:
urogard wrote:
Sweedish_Gunner wrote:Why do people keep insisting on the TOW-2 A/B being added?

The TOW-2 is 70% accuracy with 26 AP right? What more do you want out of a damn ATGM?


Image

Now imagine you would not have to pay 80+pts for this, but only 30-40 + 10/15 for infantry.


Which is why is why I suggest that it only be implemented on CFVs, leaving the broader IFV fleet with the current missile selection or the I-TOW/TOW-2/TOW-2A lineup. As such the CFV recon AFV lineup would be a tier ahead of the IFVs. TOW-2B, even if it was a 2800m missile (which I doubt it will be given how Eugen has handled other ATGMs) it would never be available on the M2A2 IFV because... Balance. If you want TOW-2B then take a M901 variant or M3A2, I guess we're saying it wasn't fielded broadly enough to give to the entire IFV fleet?

Thus USA gets a good long range slugger for the recon fight in the form of M3A2 and an incentive to take the line over cheaper options.
Projectnordic in game! will likely see you on pact/red dragons/french!
Image

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby wargamer1985 » Sat 14 Jan 2017 21:04

HrcAk47 wrote:
wargamer1985 wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:
TOW-2 could go down to 24AP while the TOW-2A can be 26AP.

What this means is a global nerf for BLUFOR, but why not.

The issue is that, realistically, the BGM-71D warrants 25 AP.


Not really, no. 800-900 is 24AP. 900-1000 25, and above is 26.

and the TOW-2 has 900-950mm penetration against armored targets depending on the sources you wish to view ("It penetrates 900 mm of armor"), with only the lowest numbers being put at a rough "it is known that current models penetrate in excess of 30 inches of RHA" or something to a similar caliber. Since the general consensus is around 900mm of penetration for the TOW-2, thus, 25 AP is warranted. 26 AP would be warranted for the TOW-2A, which defeats in excess of 1,000mm thanks to the tandem warhead.
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 14 Jan 2017 21:28

wargamer1985 wrote:and the TOW-2 has 900-950mm penetration against armored targets depending on the sources you wish to view ("It penetrates 900 mm of armor"), with only the lowest numbers being put at a rough "it is known that current models penetrate in excess of 30 inches of RHA" or something to a similar caliber. Since the general consensus is around 900mm of penetration for the TOW-2, thus, 25 AP is warranted. 26 AP would be warranted for the TOW-2A, which defeats in excess of 1,000mm thanks to the tandem warhead.


I recall it being "850-900" mm RHA. 24AP.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby wargamer1985 » Sat 14 Jan 2017 21:31

HrcAk47 wrote:
wargamer1985 wrote:and the TOW-2 has 900-950mm penetration against armored targets depending on the sources you wish to view ("It penetrates 900 mm of armor"), with only the lowest numbers being put at a rough "it is known that current models penetrate in excess of 30 inches of RHA" or something to a similar caliber. Since the general consensus is around 900mm of penetration for the TOW-2, thus, 25 AP is warranted. 26 AP would be warranted for the TOW-2A, which defeats in excess of 1,000mm thanks to the tandem warhead.


I recall it being "850-900" mm RHA. 24AP.

Grand total of one source I could find using that figure, all others state 900mm or above. That warrants 25 AP.
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

User avatar
Sweedish_Gunner
Brigadier
Posts: 3105
Joined: Thu 25 Apr 2013 20:23
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby Sweedish_Gunner » Sat 14 Jan 2017 22:10

Even so, people love to bash the TOW-2 despite it being a fantastic system.

I could see a TOW-2A for 26AP being useful in small quantities though.
Image

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby Killertomato » Sat 14 Jan 2017 22:27

wargamer1985 wrote:Grand total of one source I could find using that figure, all others state 900mm or above. That warrants 25 AP.



Woah now, one source counts for all the Yugoslav units, so clearly we can extend that privilege to American ones. Just in the other direction, of course, as they are not blessed with balkan brilliance.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Vestly
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 713
Joined: Sun 24 Mar 2013 14:19
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby Vestly » Tue 24 Jan 2017 16:36

Found this :
http://www.aijcrnet.com/journals/Vol_2_No_9_September_2012/17.pdf
A lot of info regarding a 2A46MS cannon (what was upgraded, some stuff about fcs and stabs as well, tests, etc.), which is mounted on T-72M2 Moderna.

Long story short, 2A46MS is comparable to 2A46M-5.

codextero
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat 13 Dec 2014 02:52
Contact:

Re: On T-72M2 Moderna and its FCS.

Postby codextero » Tue 24 Jan 2017 22:57

About the TOW-2 kerfuffle, I think base TOW-2 is pretty over modeled AP wise, and can probably drop a bit to open up TOW-2A for 25/26. 26AP for ATGM should be reserved for the 50kg weight class missiles.

That said, a lot of other missiles are also over modeled, cough Milan 2T, Malyutka T, Metis-M.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests